Comments on: On Newspeak, Dr. Seuss, and New Government Forms http://firstthings.com/blogs/evangel/2011/01/on-newspeak-dr-seuss-and-new-government-forms/ A First Things Blog Tue, 06 Nov 2012 13:35:02 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.4.2 By: Michael PS http://firstthings.com/blogs/evangel/2011/01/on-newspeak-dr-seuss-and-new-government-forms/#comment-16536 Michael PS Wed, 12 Jan 2011 09:28:18 +0000 http://firstthings.com/blogs/evangel/?p=9930#comment-16536 Even the definition of "Mother" is no longer straight-forward. The growth of assisted reproduction has led Europen lawyers to coin the words "Genetrix" - the woman who provided the egg and "Gestatrix" - the woman who brought it to term. Who knows what the future holds? Even the definition of “Mother” is no longer straight-forward. The growth of assisted reproduction has led Europen lawyers to coin the words “Genetrix” – the woman who provided the egg and “Gestatrix” – the woman who brought it to term.

Who knows what the future holds?

]]> By: Anthony Mator http://firstthings.com/blogs/evangel/2011/01/on-newspeak-dr-seuss-and-new-government-forms/#comment-16494 Anthony Mator Mon, 10 Jan 2011 03:19:24 +0000 http://firstthings.com/blogs/evangel/?p=9930#comment-16494 What about all the single-parent households where children don't even know who their father is? Shouldn't we eliminated the "Parent 2" category altogether, to more appropriately reflect the lowest common denominator? I guarantee there are more children who don't know one of their parents, than children who are being raised by two mothers or two fathers. But of course, everyone does have a mother and a father, biologically speaking, regardless of other extenuating factors. And it is very rare that one would be unable to obtain official records of one's biological origins. Therefore, I believe that retaining the "mother" and "father" categories is the most sensible for record-keeping, since the purpose is to establish the person's identity and citizenship as accurately as possible. Some applicants might use the names of their adoptive mothers and fathers rather than biological; but that is even more likely to happen if the instructions are generalized. That said, I do believe that in this instance, the change was not necessarily motivated by ideology. They may simply be trying to make the process easier for those of us who have really screwed up families. But that is a very sad commentary on the condition of our country, isn't it? "Family" is losing a definition, because we've ripped it apart. The basic building block of society has been crushed to bits because we think we can changed the shape and ingredients of our bricks on a whim and somehow the building won't fall. What about all the single-parent households where children don’t even know who their father is? Shouldn’t we eliminated the “Parent 2″ category altogether, to more appropriately reflect the lowest common denominator? I guarantee there are more children who don’t know one of their parents, than children who are being raised by two mothers or two fathers.

But of course, everyone does have a mother and a father, biologically speaking, regardless of other extenuating factors. And it is very rare that one would be unable to obtain official records of one’s biological origins. Therefore, I believe that retaining the “mother” and “father” categories is the most sensible for record-keeping, since the purpose is to establish the person’s identity and citizenship as accurately as possible. Some applicants might use the names of their adoptive mothers and fathers rather than biological; but that is even more likely to happen if the instructions are generalized.

That said, I do believe that in this instance, the change was not necessarily motivated by ideology. They may simply be trying to make the process easier for those of us who have really screwed up families. But that is a very sad commentary on the condition of our country, isn’t it? “Family” is losing a definition, because we’ve ripped it apart. The basic building block of society has been crushed to bits because we think we can changed the shape and ingredients of our bricks on a whim and somehow the building won’t fall.

]]>